1. Status of Garfield County’s Air Quality Monitoring Program April 6, 2006 Energy Advisory Board Meeting

2. Today’s Presentation Air Monitoring Study Overview PM10, what is it and what have we found? VOC, what is it and what have we found? How does our air compare so far? What do we know? Where do we go from here?

3. Basis of the Air Quality Monitoring Study Evaluate air quality characteristics within a portion Garfield County Address public concern regarding potentially degraded air quality from industrial activity Characterize air quality concerns of all types throughout central portion of Garfield County

4. Sampling Locations PM 10 at 7 sites (every 3 rd day) Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) monitoring at 17 locations –Fixed monitoring sites monthly or quarterly –Six additional locations are also being sampled monthly for VOC only –Grab samples Garfield County staff in response to complaints Local residents during strong odor events

6. Meteorological equipment has been installed at 6 of the fixed monitoring stations –Stations will continuously record Windspeed & direction Temperature Relative humidity Barometric pressure Precipitation (Summer) Passive ozone monitoring planned during the 2006 ozone season (June thru September) Additional Monitoring

7. Current Air Monitoring

8. What is PM 10 ? Particles less than or equal to 10 μm in diameter. Mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets many sizes and shapes can be made up of hundreds of different chemicals Health effects (particularly in sensitive populations ) pulmonary disease cardiac disease Environmental effects physical damage to buildings and vegetation soil and water chemistry effects haze and smog EPA current PM10 standards 50 µg/m3 (monthlyannual average) 150 µg/m3 (24 hour maximum) Source: http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/pmreport03/pmunderstand_2405.pdf#page=1

9. How Small?

10. Particulate Sampling Unit Intake/impact area Motor Flow Controller Barometer Elapsed Time Meter

11. PM10 Monitoring Results, 5/2005 – 2/2006 Silt-Cox high value in 7/2005 due to dirt moving activity nearby. New Castle high value in 9/2005 due to railroad re-bedding across street from site.

14. VOC Collection West Landfill

15. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Any compound of carbon, excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate, which participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions Can react with nitrogen oxides in the presence of sunlight to form ozone and photochemical smog Some can be toxic to humans, animals or vegetation. There are currently no National Ambient Air Quality Standards for VOC Source: Federal Code of Regulations

16. VOC ---June 2005 - February 2006 Detected compounds89samples(81 = 24-hour samples and 8 = grab samples) CAS # CompoundMinMaxAvgMinMaxAvg#% µg/m³ppbdetected 74-87-3Chloromethane 2.2 0.021.10 0.0111.1% 67-64-1Acetone 8.681.014.83.6034.006.226168.5% 75-69-4Trichlorofluoromethane 1.526.00.30.274.700.0622.2% 75-09-2Methylene chloride 1.83.50.10.531.000.0233.4% 108-05-4Vinyl Acetate 5.97.90.21.702.300.0733.4% 78-93-32-Butanone (MEK) 1.512.01.80.524.200.604853.9% 67-66-3Chloroform 1.6 0.020.32 0.00411.1% 71-43-2Benzene 1.6180.05.70.4957.001.804651.7% 108-88-3Toluene1.6540.016.70.43140.04.388292.1% 591-78-62-Hexanone2.14.40.10.511.100.0333.4% 127-18-4Tetrachloroethene2.3 0.030.34 0.00411.1% 100-41-4Ethylbenzene2.028.00.70.466.400.1589.0% 136777-61-2m,p-Xylenes1.8290.09.70.4067.002.246573.0% 95-47-6o-Xylene1.846.01.20.4210.000.271314.6% 106-46-71,4-Dichlorobenzene4.6 0.050.76 0.00811.1%

17. VOC Monitoring Results 6/2005 – 2/2006

19. November only,10 samples, 8-24 hour, 2 Grab Additional 29 organic compounds identified Widely varying concentrations Additional sample analysis likely needed Significant review/analysis needed to determine relevant information of source, exposure, health risk, etc. Tentatively Identified Compounds (TIC)

20. VOC Comparisons (Denver and Grand Junction) Difficult to Draw Strong Conclusions at this time Differences in the amount of data All compounds are detected in relatively small concentrations Of the 15 compounds detected, several appear to be higher than Denver or Grand Junction

21. So, What Do We Know? PM10 levels are generally low in Garfield County. Highest average PM 10 levels are in the urbanized areas. Ambient VOC levels, when detected, are very low. Grab samples in odor plumes show much higher concentrations of VOC than ambient air. Tentatively identified compounds need deeper investigation. More data, exposure information and source information is needed to determine health risks.

22. What else are we doing now? Air Quality Technical Work Group Ongoing data analysis, monitoring analysis, emissions inventory, research, information and data gathering, professional and community networking Ozone monitoring plan Collaboration with the White River National Forest ozone monitoring program Open Burning Permit/Education Work Collaboration with Local Fire Chiefs and Sheriff’s Department Complaint Response

23. What Does the Future Hold? Regular update meetings Presentation series on more specific subjects Publish the monitoring results Refine monitoring/analysis needs Secure funding for ongoing monitoring and other air quality efforts Continue to gather public input Develop and implement a community-based air quality management program

24. Challenges to the EAB Work to establish perpetual funding base for ongoing air quality monitoring Spearhead efforts to raise the standards for Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) in Garfield County Establish a leadership role in attacking air quality issues countywide

25. Questions???